Help & information    View the list of Transcripts



Tampa City Council
CRA meeting
Thursday, March 15, 2007, 8:30 a.m.


DISCLAIMER:
The following represents an unedited version of
realtime captioning which should neither be relied
upon for complete accuracy nor used as a verbatim
transcript.
The original of this transcript was produced in all
capital letters and any variation thereto may be a
result of third party edits and software compatibility
issues.
Any person who needs a verbatim transcript of the
proceedings may need to hire a court reporter.



08:35:31 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Good morning.
08:35:32 The Community Redevelopment Agency is now called to
08:35:34 order.
08:35:34 Please roll call.
08:35:37 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: Here.
08:35:38 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.
08:35:39 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.
08:35:42 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Here.

08:35:46 Okay, Mr. Huey, you're up.
08:35:49 >> Good morning.
08:35:51 Good to be with you.
08:35:53 We have a presentation this morning about two
08:35:57 policies, important policies for the redevelopment
08:36:01 agency.
08:36:03 As a way of background, we have one policy like this
08:36:07 in place now, a financial, and administration policy.
08:36:11 And today what we will be presenting to you for
08:36:14 discussion is a policy relating to advisory committee
08:36:17 and a policy relating to borrowing.
08:36:22 Do you have copies of each of those?
08:36:54 These are policies that we have been able to share
08:36:56 with our advisory groups and solicit input on.
08:37:02 The TIF borrowing for major projects policy answer it
08:37:07 is question that you have often asked us, which is,
08:37:10 will we bond off of or finance off of TIF revenues?
08:37:14 And this policy is intended to answer that question.
08:37:18 You have recently been involved in an option related
08:37:23 to downtown on this issue and the Drew Park strategic
08:37:26 plan that you will be asked to adopt shortly
08:37:28 contemplates an option related to this policy.

08:37:32 So it's an important policy.
08:37:37 There are two elements to the policy.
08:37:40 The first is called general condition.
08:37:42 And that essentially is our baseline answer to the
08:37:47 question, will we borrow against TIF revenues?
08:37:51 And essentially what it says there is that our
08:37:53 standard policy is that we will borrow against TIF
08:37:57 revenues based on market condition.
08:38:00 So where there are sufficient TIF revenues to support
08:38:06 bond or other financing of our TIF revenues without
08:38:09 any city backing or guarantee by the city general
08:38:14 fund, if you will, we will in fact use that kind of
08:38:20 financing to help with infrastructure in our
08:38:22 redevelopment areas.
08:38:25 The second part of the policy is called special
08:38:27 conditions.
08:38:28 And it simply points out that there may be unique
08:38:31 circumstances where it would be prudent to do
08:38:34 something different.
08:38:37 An example of that would be the Drew Park strategic
08:38:39 action plan, which you received a presentation on.
08:38:42 There you might recall there is a major stormwater

08:38:46 project that is contemplated.
08:38:48 And there are significant non-TIF revenues that are
08:38:52 anticipated to be a part of that project.
08:38:55 In order to get those TIF revenues, we'll have to
08:38:59 ensure SWFWMD and other parties that worry intending
08:39:01 to move forward expeditiously on the project.
08:39:04 And that might require us for some short amount of
08:39:07 time in financing to make available the city's
08:39:10 guarantee.
08:39:11 The principle at play is prudent.
08:39:15 Would it be reasonable?
08:39:15 Would it be a good idea, a prudent idea to in fact use
08:39:21 the city's backing in a wise way, in that situation?
08:39:26 And what you will see in that policy are some examples
08:39:30 of those situations.
08:39:32 They are not intended to be exhaustive, but for
08:39:34 illustrative purposes, they give you a feel of what
08:39:40 situations those might be.
08:39:41 So, again, that's an outline of the policy.
08:39:45 And I'll be glad to answer any questions.
08:39:48 None of the communities have any problems with this,
08:39:52 or any feedback to it that would cause us to adjust

08:39:57 the policy.
08:39:59 So be glad to --
08:40:04 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Any questions?
08:40:06 >>GWEN MILLER: No questions.
08:40:07 Just glad you met with the CRA groups.
08:40:09 That's what they have been wanting and thank you for
08:40:11 that.
08:40:11 You're doing a great job.
08:40:14 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Very good.
08:40:15 Thank you, Mr. Huey.
08:40:16 >>MARK HUEY: The second policy is ...
08:40:50 I would like to take a few minutes to walk you through
08:40:53 this actually paragraph by paragraph.
08:40:58 The first paragraph is the important one.
08:40:59 If you could just take a minute to read through that,
08:41:02 it really sets the whole stage of what this policy is
08:41:05 all about.
08:41:09 The advisory committees play a very important function
08:41:12 as you are well aware in our planning for our
08:41:14 redevelopment areas.
08:41:16 And each of them is very different as noted in this
08:41:22 paragraph.

08:41:22 And so each advisory committee takes its own shape in
08:41:27 some unique way.
08:41:28 And this policy is intending to reflect that, in that
08:41:32 when can't prescribe in every situation for each
08:41:36 redevelopment area exactly how an advisory committee
08:41:39 should work.
08:41:43 At the very beginning of the policy we acknowledge
08:41:45 that, and we acknowledge that what we are trying to do
08:41:47 here is provide a set of guidelines that seem to make
08:41:51 good sense, that each community can use as a guideline
08:41:57 and adjust as appropriate and as found for the
08:42:01 specific circumstances of their redevelopment area.
08:42:09 So their introductory paragraph really sets that tone.
08:42:12 The second paragraph speaks to ideally how an advisory
08:42:15 committee is formed
08:42:22 As you can see, it relates to sort of a grassroots
08:42:25 effort on the part of the community to appoint an
08:42:27 advisory group.
08:42:29 We do suggest approximately seven.
08:42:32 And you can see in the tone of that that in some areas
08:42:35 we know seven doesn't work.
08:42:37 For example, Ybor City.

08:42:38 There are too many stakeholder groups in Ybor to
08:42:41 constrain it to seven.
08:42:43 Other areas, seven really does work quite well.
08:42:48 The very nature of the community engagement is also
08:42:51 something that's different.
08:42:53 For example, in East Tampa, this is modeled most
08:42:59 effectively, whereas in Drew Park there isn't really
08:43:02 that grassroots community engagement the way this
08:43:06 policy would ideally contemplate.
08:43:08 But it's something we would work toward.
08:43:10 So, again, each area is different.
08:43:12 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Mr. Huey, would you maybe put a
08:43:18 minimum "of" instead of "approximately"?
08:43:23 >>MARK HUEY: Yes, if that's -- let me walk through
08:43:30 this and see if I can keep the flow going, and then
08:43:33 I'm happy to answer questions.
08:43:34 But we are certainly happy to tailor this in any way
08:43:39 you think best.
08:43:40 The third paragraph, the first sentence really calls
08:43:42 out the purpose of the committee, as representing the
08:43:46 interest of the community in the context of the CRA
08:43:50 plan, and the tax increment financing budget.

08:43:55 The second sentence calls out criteria for membership.
08:44:01 And so what you see is that we want to have folks on
08:44:07 the team who are engaged, either living, working, have
08:44:10 business interests in a redevelopment area.
08:44:13 And you see in the last sentence where we are also
08:44:18 hoping to attract some members who have an expertise
08:44:22 in the redevelopment process, who can provide some
08:44:25 tech any -- technical support to the neighborhoods.
08:44:30 The fourth paragraph talk about terms of service for
08:44:37 advisory members.
08:44:41 And what we are trying to do there is really balance a
08:44:45 continuity of thought with bringing fresh -- and
08:44:55 engage folks into the process over time.
08:44:57 So what you see here is an approach that we suggested
08:45:00 staggered terms of engagements so not everyone is
08:45:06 coming off an advisory committee at the same time, and
08:45:09 suggesting one-term limits, which again would allow
08:45:13 for new engagements each year of new members.
08:45:20 And the last sentence really acknowledges that in some
08:45:24 communities, that's not possible, where, for example,
08:45:29 in the downtown area, I don't think we are going to
08:45:31 have much trouble finding folks who want to get

08:45:34 involved.
08:45:36 In some neighborhoods, it is more challenging.
08:45:38 And so when that's the case, this is an area that that
08:45:45 community can say we need to tweak it for where we are
08:45:49 as a community.
08:45:53 The next paragraph talks about the role of the
08:45:56 chairperson and points out the specific areas of
08:45:59 leadership.
08:46:00 It also calls for there to be a vice chairman of an
08:46:04 advisory committee, which then helps to provide
08:46:07 continuity.
08:46:11 In turning the page, the next paragraph deals with the
08:46:15 situation of what if there is an effective member of
08:46:21 an advisory committee, someone who is not representing
08:46:24 interest of the community?
08:46:26 And contemplate even the situation where there may be
08:46:32 a chairperson who is -- who hasn't been involved in
08:46:35 many committees and boards, where that situation isn't
08:46:39 being addressed effectively.
08:46:40 This policy would call out the urban development
08:46:46 department, the chair, and the committee are all
08:46:48 accountable for that process.

08:46:50 It contemplates that that couldn't be arbitrary, but
08:46:55 as you can see the basis for ineffectiveness would be
08:46:58 put in writing, and it also provides for a period for
08:47:00 the committee to work with that ineffective word board
08:47:05 member, whether they are not attending meetings or
08:47:07 there's something about the way they conduct
08:47:08 themselves in a meeting, which is not furthering the
08:47:11 interest of the community, there is an ability for
08:47:14 that to be corrected.
08:47:15 But if not, if they continue to be an ineffective, the
08:47:22 term of service would end.
08:47:24 The next paragraph speaks about the relationship of
08:47:29 the committee to the development manager as a key
08:47:34 resource and their relationship in the second sentence
08:47:37 to the community, that they have that sense of owning
08:47:43 community input for their community.
08:47:47 The final three paragraphs speak to sort of the
08:47:52 decision process, if you will, both the way our
08:47:56 process unfolds.
08:47:57 The first part of that paragraph emphasizes their role
08:48:03 in the TIF planning and amendment process.
08:48:06 It references the existing policy that we have, that

08:48:10 was put in place in April.
08:48:14 The next paragraph acknowledges that all of the work
08:48:19 of the committee as it relates to TIF budgeting and
08:48:22 plan amendment come into a public process, which is
08:48:25 before you, leading up to really the ultimate decision
08:48:31 authority, which is this board, which is to
08:48:38 acknowledge that this board ultimately is accountable
08:48:41 for the work of redevelopment.
08:48:43 So that is an overview of the policy.
08:48:47 And I would be happy to answer questions.
08:48:50 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Madam Chairman, would you prefer to
08:48:52 hear public comment, or hear from the council members
08:48:55 first?
08:48:56 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I would like to hear from council
08:48:57 members first.
08:48:58 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Okay.
08:48:59 Mr. Huey, thank you for giving this to us.
08:49:02 I think it's a good start.
08:49:03 If I were to -- my big issue is where you put in the
08:49:09 words, particularly on page 2, the first paragraph, it
08:49:19 says: The committee will relay the community's input,
08:49:23 and then you wrote -- to the city's manager who

08:49:27 represents their area.
08:49:27 Then in paragraph 3, the department will use the
08:49:29 committee's recommendations.
08:49:31 Every place where you wrote the staff individual, I
08:49:34 feel that the real way that this should function is
08:49:39 that the input should come directly to City Council
08:49:43 sitting in as the Community Redevelopment Agency.
08:49:46 I feel that the staff's role is to facilitate the
08:49:49 meetings, to provide support, to provide technical
08:49:54 support from the city.
08:49:55 But beginning in April, I think that City Council is
08:49:58 going to put much more time aside, like at 1:30 every
08:50:02 other week, for CRA meetings.
08:50:04 So we'll have the chance to be much more engaged and
08:50:06 involved and have a much more complete understanding
08:50:09 of exactly what the community's concerns are, and be
08:50:13 able to work directly with the community to build
08:50:15 their budget.
08:50:16 And I don't think that the staff, functioning as the
08:50:19 filter, is as effective as hearing directly in council
08:50:23 chambers from the committee to the CRA.
08:50:27 Therefore, while this is a good first step, I think

08:50:31 that's a big flaw.
08:50:32 The second flaw is that the people who are serving on
08:50:35 these advisory committees all from a variety of
08:50:39 backgrounds, are adult, they probably functioned in
08:50:41 the world, and they know how committees should work.
08:50:44 And I think that the suggestion that the guidelines
08:50:49 should be followed unless, quote, relevant
08:50:52 circumstances justify an alternative approach mutually
08:50:54 agreed upon by the staff and the community," I don't
08:50:58 think that that credits the community properly with
08:51:00 being able to self-govern.
08:51:02 I think that everybody needs a road map for
08:51:05 governance, and I think these committees are certainly
08:51:08 capable of developing that.
08:51:09 But the two-year term suggested, you know, the rates
08:51:17 of participation, the suggested chairman on the board,
08:51:22 I think that we should allow each group to develop
08:51:25 their own set of criteria that they are comfortable
08:51:29 with.
08:51:29 And I think that the staff should be supportive.
08:51:33 But I think that the -- that we should respect the
08:51:38 maturity and commitment of each of these advisory

08:51:43 committees to speak for themselves directly to the CRA
08:51:46 without the filtration of staff.
08:51:54 >>> If I could just comment.
08:51:55 There's no intention here in any way to slight or
08:51:59 suggest that neighborhoods cannot come up with their
08:52:02 own way of doing things.
08:52:04 It's really an intention to provide also some
08:52:09 oversight by you in this very important function, to
08:52:15 provide some guidance in the process, some oversight.
08:52:19 Because, again, I can assure, there are things about
08:52:22 this policy that -- or the suggested guidelines here
08:52:27 that will cause many of our redevelopment areas to
08:52:32 give some reflection to, to be able to through their
08:52:35 functioning.
08:52:36 And that's not intended in any way to slight anyone
08:52:41 anyway.
08:52:43 >> I don't think that was your intention but that's
08:52:45 the way it feels.
08:52:46 And we now have the civilized policy of looking at
08:52:49 something today and not voting on it for a week.
08:52:51 What I'll do is prepare a suggestion, a list of
08:52:56 suggests and share that with the other members up here

08:52:59 so that they'll have a week to look at my
08:53:01 recommendations.
08:53:02 But the other thing, if you look at this whole
08:53:05 recommendation of a policy, the CRA board doesn't
08:53:08 appear until the last page, the last paragraph.
08:53:11 It says: Having taken into account comments from the
08:53:13 above groups, the Community Redevelopment Agency will
08:53:16 take formal action.
08:53:17 And I really see us being more directly engaged with
08:53:22 the advisory committee, having direct communication
08:53:24 with them here in our meeting area, and being able to
08:53:29 work with them more directly.
08:53:30 And I think that's what they want.
08:53:32 And I think it's what we want.
08:53:34 And I think in the future, we will be willing to take
08:53:37 the time to make that happen.
08:53:44 The other thing --
08:53:46 >>> I'm not sure if there's anything about this policy
08:53:47 that would preclude what you are suggesting.
08:53:49 >> No, it wouldn't preclude it.
08:53:51 >>> Making more time available, I'm sure the
08:53:53 advisory -- all the advisory groups would love to

08:53:56 engage with you more.
08:53:57 And we don't have any issues with that and I don't
08:53:59 think this policy would in any way not allow that sort
08:54:03 of dialogue to occur.
08:54:05 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Mr. Huey, let me.
08:54:09 Mr. Huey, if we go the route that Ms. Saul-Sena says,
08:54:14 does that mean the advisory board cannot talk to each
08:54:16 other?
08:54:18 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: No, it's that they talk to us
08:54:20 here.
08:54:20 >>MARY ALVAREZ: No, what I'm saying in the advisory
08:54:24 capacity.
08:54:27 >>MARK HUEY: What Mary is bringing to the FORE is the
08:54:30 advisory reports to you, they will all be in the is
08:54:34 sunshine and they will then be that is really not the
08:54:41 way these groups --
08:54:43 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'm not suggesting that, Mr. Huey.
08:54:46 I'm suggesting they come down like they come today to
08:54:48 talk to the CRA.
08:54:49 >>MARY ALVAREZ: But we haven't stopped them.
08:54:52 Had you hue that's what I was trying to say. This
08:54:54 won't stop them from doing that.

08:54:56 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Neither will what I'm suggesting,
08:54:59 Mr. Hue.
08:55:01 You know what?
08:55:02 I will write down --
08:55:12 >> Part of what we have been trying to do --
08:55:19 >> We can't make at direct report.
08:55:21 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: No, we just want to hear from them
08:55:23 at our meeting.
08:55:24 >> Coming up on how we structure that.
08:55:27 I just want to let you know that.
08:55:30 We will look at it and we will provide you as much
08:55:32 access as we possibly K.
08:55:33 We are always free to come down here.
08:55:36 Anybody can feel free to come down and talk to
08:55:38 council.
08:55:39 We just need to not make them advisory committee
08:55:41 directly to council.
08:55:42 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: No.
08:55:47 >> And I'll do exactly what you want.
08:55:49 What I want to do is structure it so that you have the
08:55:51 maximum direct input.
08:55:52 We think we can get away with and avoid the sunshine

08:55:55 application.
08:55:56 Because these people do want to talk.
08:56:00 Thank you.
08:56:03 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Mr. Reddick.
08:56:05 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
08:56:06 Mr. Huey, I do agree that the advisory committee
08:56:14 should remain independent where they can come and
08:56:16 speak freely to the council.
08:56:18 The CRA board.
08:56:19 I support that.
08:56:22 I have some reservation, paragraph 4, when you state
08:56:28 about the terms should be limited to one term, should
08:56:31 be -- term of service should be limited to one term.
08:56:37 The problem I'm having is, the majority of people,
08:56:40 community of volunteers, and it's hard enough to get
08:56:43 volunteers to participate in any type of organization.
08:56:45 And when you limit the terms that they serve, it's
08:56:50 hard to go out and recruit.
08:56:52 For example, take East Tampa.
08:56:56 The election today, nobody else is want to be
08:57:02 president or chairman, whatever the position.
08:57:03 So that person serves by default because no one else

08:57:08 wanted to come.
08:57:10 >> Exactly.
08:57:11 >>> It says terms of service should.
08:57:13 Because we acknowledge that.
08:57:14 And in and East Tampa is a great example of where that
08:57:18 exact limiting it to one term at this time in East
08:57:22 Tampa's life wouldn't work.
08:57:24 You know what?
08:57:24 In ten years, it might.
08:57:26 In ten years it may be a very different situation
08:57:28 where there may be a lot more interest.
08:57:31 And we might not have the challenges in East Tampa
08:57:33 that we have now.
08:57:34 But I think you're raising a very good point.
08:57:37 And why do we write this with a lot of shape and
08:57:43 guideline, because we are just really trying to
08:57:46 provide that and where good reasons not to do it, and
08:57:50 I would concur with you what you are saying, and East
08:57:52 Tampa as an example --
08:57:55 >>MARY ALVAREZ: But you can use Drew Park.
08:57:57 A prime example.
08:57:59 >>> Even a more significant example.

08:58:01 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Exactly.
08:58:05 >>> But as an alternative downtown, I think -- they
08:58:08 would have a hard time justifying that one term of
08:58:11 service wouldn't in downtown based on my phone ringing
08:58:16 off the hook with people who would like to serve on
08:58:19 that at this point.
08:58:20 So again each area is going to be a little different
08:58:22 and we'll be able to interpret these guidelines in
08:58:25 their own way.
08:58:27 >>FRANK REDDICK: Will this be to all CRAs?
08:58:31 >>MARK HUEY: This is the point, yes.
08:58:34 And that's why it's very challenging to write, because
08:58:36 we are trying to cover wide latitude of development,
08:58:40 challenge and community engagement with this.
08:58:41 >>FRANK REDDICK: In that case, I think something be
08:58:46 placed for area CRAs where we are having a problem
08:58:54 getting those who want to serve, the flexibility.
08:58:56 >>MARK HUEY: Do you feel like the last sentence that
08:58:58 reads: However, if candidate members are not
08:59:02 forthcoming members may be requested to continue to
08:59:05 serve until members are identified?
08:59:07 >>GWEN MILLER: If the term is up and they want to run

08:59:11 again they have the opportunity to serve again.
08:59:14 >>MARK HUEY: That's exactly why they put that sentence
08:59:17 in there.
08:59:18 East Tampa was one of the areas that we know is
08:59:20 challenged in that way.
08:59:29 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Drew Park, they just don't show up.
08:59:34 They maybe have 3 or 4.
08:59:45 There's no one on the advisory committee that lives or
08:59:47 works.
08:59:48 But guess what.
08:59:49 In ten years there will be thousands of people there,
08:59:53 and so again this is really trying to contemplate many
08:59:58 different situations, not just today, but over time.
09:00:02 And trying to provide a set of guidelines that each
09:00:05 community can adopt to their need.
09:00:10 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Anything else?
09:00:11 Mr. Fletcher.
09:00:13 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: I actually initially was going to
09:00:16 ask for something different but I think you addressed
09:00:18 my concerns about the terms and the makeup of the
09:00:22 committees.
09:00:26 I served on a lot of advisory committees in my time,

09:00:29 and in a lot of cases you don't really get up to
09:00:32 speed, understand what you are supposed to be doing
09:00:36 until your third and fourth year.
09:00:38 I don't really see anything that precludes terms of
09:00:43 that length of time but you do talk of terms one to
09:00:45 three years and I would hope that would be the
09:00:47 exception rather than the rule.
09:00:49 I don't think most people are going to get a lot done.
09:00:54 >>> We had the one to three years because that's how
09:00:56 we wanted to initially, when I started the work,
09:00:59 stagger terms.
09:01:00 So someone needs -- a lot of times it's hard to get
09:01:04 someone to committee to four years at an initial term.
09:01:07 So typically, you set up a first board.
09:01:10 Some people are on for just a year.
09:01:12 And some are on for two and some are on for three and
09:01:15 you start the process.
09:01:19 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: The second point as I listened to
09:01:21 this conversation bothers me a little bit is -- and
09:01:25 probably there's some history here and some things
09:01:27 that I'm not aware of -- but to have advisory
09:01:29 committees that are providing input that we

09:01:34 ultimately, through the staff, will be acting on, that
09:01:39 operate outside the sunshine troubles me.
09:01:41 I am not terribly comfortable with that.
09:01:44 And I am not sure I 100% agree with what Mr. Smith
09:01:52 said about how we can shield these folks from the
09:01:55 sunshine.
09:01:56 I would defer to him on that.
09:01:57 But I personally would not support an approach that
09:02:01 allowed these groups to operate outside the sunshine.
09:02:08 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Mr. Dingfelder?
09:02:11 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Fletcher made one of the points
09:02:13 I was going to make.
09:02:14 David Smith, I know that you were coming down to
09:02:19 rescue us as usual.
09:02:20 But I don't necessarily agree with the policy
09:02:22 implications of what you said.
09:02:24 Frankly, I would like to hear from the community and
09:02:29 from the various members as different advisory
09:02:32 committees that are here today about sunshine.
09:02:35 I was under the notion that some or all of these
09:02:39 boards are already meeting under sunshine.
09:02:41 And I didn't know -- I didn't know that we were

09:02:44 attempting to stray from that.
09:02:46 So I think that's something we need to talk about it.
09:02:51 I agree with several of my fellow council members
09:02:53 about the term.
09:02:54 I think that what we should do there, mark, is say
09:02:59 that it should be limited to one or two terms.
09:03:02 And I think that way we can provide the flexibility
09:03:05 for each of the CACs to forge their own way
09:03:09 depending on their own circumstances.
09:03:15 In the first paragraph, you say that they should
09:03:18 follow these guidelines, unless circumstances -- as
09:03:24 mutually agreed upon by the department and the
09:03:25 community.
09:03:27 And again, as Ms. Saul-Sena said, I think we should
09:03:30 probably be plugged into that one as well, you know,
09:03:35 if there's going to be some sort of straying from the
09:03:38 policy that we adopt, that I would think we would be
09:03:41 involved in that.
09:03:42 And then finally, this last paragraph on the first
09:03:46 page talks about how you get rid of an ineffective
09:03:50 representative.
09:03:51 And that worries me a little bit.

09:03:55 The last paragraph on the first page.
09:03:58 How you get rid of an ineffective representative.
09:04:00 It worries me a little bit because I worry that if
09:04:03 somebody comes in and they attend meetings regularly
09:04:06 and they have a different opinion that everybody --
09:04:09 than everybody else, then they could be kind of black
09:04:12 bald and shoved -- black balled and shoved aside and
09:04:18 eventually ex communicated from the group.
09:04:20 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Actually, they don't need a policy for
09:04:23 that.
09:04:24 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: So that concerns me a little bit.
09:04:26 I think if somebody is appointed, and -- no, they
09:04:30 don't get appointed by us, they get appointed by the
09:04:32 community itself.
09:04:33 I think as long as they show up to the meetings and
09:04:35 attend, and they are not disruptive or something, you
09:04:38 know, verbally or whatever, then I think they have a
09:04:42 right to continue.
09:04:43 >>MARK HUEY: And that's why if anyone had suggestions,
09:04:49 we are open to them.
09:04:50 But we set a very high bar here, the kind of thing
09:04:54 you're describing where someone could just have

09:04:56 contrary ideas, and want to be black balled.
09:04:59 There has to be a written statement, to sort of do
09:05:05 things behind the scenes, if you will.
09:05:07 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Well, like all of us -- like all of
09:05:10 us, we have all been members of lots of committees and
09:05:12 lots of boards, and I think the only reason that I'm
09:05:14 aware of that you can get tossed off the committees
09:05:16 and boards if that I served on is if you don't attend.
09:05:20 I don't think it should have anything to do with, you
09:05:21 know, other levels of effectiveness or ineffectiveness
09:05:25 or attitude or what have you.
09:05:26 So I think we need to perhaps hone that in more on
09:05:30 attendance.
09:05:33 >>MARK HUEY: So we used the term ineffective term of
09:05:37 the community of interest, and you feel that's too
09:05:39 broad.
09:05:40 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Too broad.
09:05:41 It leaves a little bit of opportunity for these others
09:05:47 that I just described.
09:05:48 Other than that, I think it's a good shot at sort of a
09:05:51 general and broad policy.
09:05:52 I'm sure that was your intent, was to be as general

09:05:56 and broad as possible so you can impact all the
09:06:00 different CRAs.
09:06:03 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Smith.
09:06:03 >>DAVID SMITH: City attorney again.
09:06:06 I should probably explain, some of the problems you
09:06:08 are addressing are the problems we created for Mark.
09:06:13 To employ in order to not make these sunshine act
09:06:16 entities was to make them not within your control.
09:06:19 Now, there's a tension between your control and your
09:06:22 participation in the sunshine law.
09:06:24 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Make it all sunshine.
09:06:28 >>> And this is a policy that you need to decide that
09:06:30 your view is we want a sunshine act entity.
09:06:32 What we were trying to avoid was inadvertent sunshine
09:06:37 entity where the participants didn't think they were
09:06:39 subject to the sunshine act, then the neighborhoods at
09:06:44 Acropolis or wherever they happen to be and talk about
09:06:48 neighborhood issues that would be a sunshine act
09:06:50 violation if it was in the purview of their committee.
09:06:52 You may prefer to make it a sunshine committee for the
09:06:54 very reasons that are articulated here.
09:06:56 I need to know what the direction of this council is.

09:07:00 And as Mark can tell you there are some committee
09:07:02 members, I believe, who will not want to serve if they
09:07:06 are a sunshine act committee because they are so
09:07:08 involved in their community that it causes them
09:07:10 problems to legally not supposed to talk about things
09:07:12 that might come before them.
09:07:17 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And we need community input on that
09:07:20 and there's lots of folks that can speak to that.
09:07:22 >>DAVID SMITH: I wanted to clarify that.
09:07:24 It's an effort we attempted to do to help Mark
09:07:27 accomplish his objective.
09:07:28 So some of the problems are not really of Mark's
09:07:31 creation, they were ours.
09:07:32 I want you to understand that.
09:07:34 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think inherently there's a lot of
09:07:36 public money involved in all of these, which leans
09:07:40 itself toward, you know, even these committees who are
09:07:43 advisory committees being in the sunshine.
09:07:46 But if folks have other ideas and, you know, suggests,
09:07:50 I think we are open.
09:07:56 >>MARK HUEY: Our concern -- I appreciate David taking
09:07:59 the sword but it's a mutual thing.

09:08:01 We are really not wanting to set up the way our
09:08:03 advisory boards function for failure.
09:08:07 And they do interact much as a neighborhood group that
09:08:11 you are familiar with would.
09:08:12 And so we try to craft this policy to allow that kind
09:08:16 of neighborhood engagement.
09:08:17 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Mr. Fletcher.
09:08:25 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: Getting back to councilman
09:08:27 Dingfelder's issue about removal of ineffective
09:08:30 members.
09:08:32 One thing that I've heard about, not on any of these
09:08:37 boards but other circumstances, where someone is
09:08:38 supposed to represent a certain constituency from the
09:08:41 community, and there are folks that are of the opinion
09:08:45 that they are either not communicating or don't share
09:08:50 that common interest.
09:08:51 And I guess I would be interested to hear as folks
09:08:53 speak who are involved in these boards whether that's
09:08:56 been a problem and whether that is something they need
09:08:58 to be able to address as part of this policy.
09:09:02 So that's an observation and some interest and some
09:09:06 input on that.

09:09:08 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like to hear -- I didn't
09:09:11 see addressed in here who would make these
09:09:13 appointments.
09:09:13 Would it be the staff?
09:09:15 It would be the neighborhood?
09:09:16 It would be us sitting as a CRA board?
09:09:18 And when people come up and speak, I'd like to hear
09:09:21 them address that.
09:09:21 Because I think that's really germane.
09:09:27 >>MARK HUEY: Yes, that would be paragraph 2.
09:09:28 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: It wasn't clear to me.
09:09:31 Can you explain it?
09:09:35 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: It's potentially vague to leave it
09:09:38 open as to each group.
09:09:40 >>MARK HUEY: Yes, it's a grassroots -- and again the
09:09:43 best example in East Tampa where it functions well.
09:09:46 In Drew Park, it's really been a collection of -- it's
09:09:50 been a little more top-down because we haven't been
09:09:53 able yet to build that widespread grassroots
09:09:56 engagement.
09:09:57 So we have solicited and involved major stakeholders.
09:10:01 But, yeah, what is contemplated here is the ideal

09:10:08 that's probably best represented by East Tampa
09:10:10 presently.
09:10:11 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Mr. Huey, when you give committee
09:10:20 policy to each of the groups, the advisory groups,
09:10:23 could they do their own bylaws based on your policy,
09:10:29 and --
09:10:30 >>MARK HUEY: Yes.
09:10:31 Those who aren't doing that to really contemplate some
09:10:34 discussion about --
09:10:37 >>MARY ALVAREZ: So this could be a guideline for them
09:10:39 as to their own bylaws, which I think is a good thing.
09:10:42 I mean, they can craft it the way they want and they
09:10:45 feel like they need.
09:10:46 Each community is completely different.
09:10:56 Instead of "approximately."
09:10:59 In the second paragraph.
09:11:00 >>MARK HUEY: I'm fine with that.
09:11:02 I can't think of a redevelopment area.
09:11:13 That would be fine.
09:11:16 >>FRANK REDDICK: I have one final question, if I may.
09:11:20 If the community developed bylaws, for example, and we
09:11:25 have this policy, if the community said their bylaws,

09:11:36 they are unlimited --
09:11:39 >>MARK HUEY: If they said what now?
09:11:41 >>FRANK REDDICK: Unlimited.
09:11:42 And this policy states two-year term, something like
09:11:46 that.
09:11:46 Which policy will govern?
09:11:53 >>MARK HUEY: Well, you kind of raised an easy
09:11:56 situation.
09:11:56 If you go back to the first paragraph, at the very
09:12:00 last sentence, what it says is that we look at
09:12:05 relevant circumstances together to justify difference.
09:12:10 Now your difference would be justifiable, to say it's
09:12:13 forever.
09:12:14 So that would be an easy one to deal with.
09:12:17 More particular to East Tampa where two-year terms, or
09:12:22 two terms of services are advocated for.
09:12:26 As a specific example, based on what I know, that
09:12:29 would be a justifiable change from this policy.
09:12:33 So does that answer your question?
09:12:36 >>FRANK REDDICK: Yes.
09:12:37 And the reason I'm saying it with East Tampa, we have
09:12:45 bylaws which we govern ourselves by.

09:12:47 And when this new policy comes into play, I'm
09:12:53 wondering if it will interfere with some of the
09:12:55 establishing rules we have in place, like do we have
09:12:57 to adopt this policy, or continue to adhere to our own
09:13:00 policies?
09:13:01 >>MARK HUEY: Yeah.
09:13:03 I think where there's good justification, and there's
09:13:07 nothing I'm aware of, and I represented this to the
09:13:09 East Tampa community about this policy that would
09:13:12 change in any way that East Tampa is intending to
09:13:17 govern itself at this point.
09:13:22 >>MARY ALVAREZ: okay, is there anyone in the public
09:13:24 that would like to comment?
09:13:25 Please line up.
09:13:53 >>> (speaking away from microphone)
09:13:57 >> Mr. Fletcher?
09:14:00 >>> If this group is making recommendations so the
09:14:03 plans or something like that, and the board is making
09:14:06 the ultimate decision on that, the concept that there
09:14:11 would be a conflict in the recommendations that they
09:14:13 are making?
09:14:16 >>> We haven't decided.

09:14:17 That's what we are gap willing with now.
09:14:22 Grappling with now.
09:14:26 >>MARK HUEY: It could be that there is some TIF
09:14:49 investment from programs that really involves that
09:14:51 particular developer.
09:14:53 And so that's an example again, we don't want to
09:14:56 discourage the policy by advocating for folks being on
09:15:03 the board who have a vested interest live and work and
09:15:07 have interest.
09:15:09 I think what Sal says, it really sets up the potential
09:15:14 for conflict of interest.
09:15:15 So we just need to figure out some language that will
09:15:17 work on over the coming weeks to balance that.
09:15:20 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: From my perspective, and you have
09:15:25 got to have people actively engaged in the community,
09:15:28 and those people actively engaged in the community
09:15:29 will be affected by these redevelopment plans.
09:15:31 So I think you have got an inherent conflict, unless
09:15:35 it's being abused, I don't personally see that there's
09:15:38 a tremendous issue there.
09:15:40 But I'll defer to legal staff to evaluate that.
09:15:46 >>> (off microphone)

09:15:58 >>> Kinsey, Ashton drive, East Tampa, the chairperson
09:16:01 of the East Tampa community revitalization
09:16:03 partnership.
09:16:04 First I want to thank you all for the interest that
09:16:06 you have shown in this, and some of the concerns that
09:16:10 you voiced already, concerns of mine.
09:16:13 And you would think that we have been having some
09:16:15 lengthy discussions with you about these policies.
09:16:18 First let me say to you that in East Tampa, we do
09:16:21 operate in the sunshine.
09:16:22 All of our meetings are noticed
09:16:30 Occasionally we talked to each other outside of a
09:16:32 former meeting.
09:16:33 For example, we get calls all of the time from people
09:16:36 who want to be a part of something.
09:16:38 I may call the chairperson of the committees and say,
09:16:42 University of South Florida wants to get involved,
09:16:44 it's something that sounds like it's something to do
09:16:46 with your committee, I recommend you talk to them
09:16:48 about that.
09:16:49 That it's such an efficient meeting at sometimes they
09:16:52 are all noticed.

09:16:55 One of the things is, also in East Tampa, we have set
09:17:00 of bylaws, but also a policy that was a conflict of
09:17:09 interest.
09:17:09 We have a code of ethics that we are governed by to
09:17:12 make sure this doesn't happen.
09:17:15 The other thing that concerned me also is that we work
09:17:17 with the city staff also as a check and balance, the
09:17:23 city, the community.
09:17:24 Frequently, we believe that city staff might want to
09:17:26 do things that's not in our best interest.
09:17:29 And so we don't believe that city staff should be
09:17:33 involved in any decisions about whether or not
09:17:36 community people are effective.
09:17:38 For example, my community put me here.
09:17:41 If I'm not representing them properly, it is up to
09:17:44 them to remove me, not Mark Huey's office.
09:17:49 And even though mark might say I have good intentions,
09:17:51 we have to write policies that stand the test of time,
09:17:54 not to be based on who the individuals are that's
09:17:57 serving at the particular point in time.
09:17:59 So consequently we may have disagreements with Mark.
09:18:03 Should Mark then be deciding I'm ineffective?

09:18:06 I don't think so.
09:18:07 And the other thing is, we oftentimes think city staff
09:18:13 has been ineffective.
09:18:15 What alternatives do we have?
09:18:17 What policy there is that says to me, I can take
09:18:20 action against Mark.
09:18:21 The only alternative I have is, one, to appeal to his
09:18:26 boss, and ultimately to appeal to you for relief.
09:18:30 He has that same alternative.
09:18:32 If we are not doing what he thinks we ought to be
09:18:35 doing, he can appeal to the mayor.
09:18:36 He can even come to you as the CRA board and you are
09:18:40 the ultimate authority for the CRA.
09:18:42 He can appeal to you to say, this group isn't
09:18:45 functioning.
09:18:46 And ask you to call us in to a meeting to talk to us
09:18:51 about what we do, how we do, et cetera.
09:18:53 So just like I have to appeal to some other authority,
09:19:00 why should they be deciding whether or not I'm
09:19:02 effective?
09:19:02 They didn't put me here.
09:19:04 Are they able to control the community groups?

09:19:09 I don't think so.
09:19:10 Once the city staff begins to control us, people like
09:19:13 me will no longer want to be involved.
09:19:17 But I can promise you this.
09:19:19 If a policy allows the city staff to decide whether or
09:19:22 not I'm effective, that ends my participation.
09:19:26 I can promise you that.
09:19:28 There are other people that do the same thing.
09:19:30 So I am going to ask you that you not allow them to
09:19:33 have that kind of decision.
09:19:35 When it comes to the length of terms that we serve,
09:19:38 the community should decide who represents them and
09:19:41 how well, not the city.
09:19:43 This policy isn't our request.
09:19:46 They decided they want this policy.
09:19:49 What made them decide that?
09:19:53 I thank you.
09:19:55 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Thank you.
09:19:56 Mr. Fletcher?
09:19:58 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: Mr. Kinsey, I just had a couple
09:20:00 questions for my own information about in this
09:20:03 context.

09:20:04 I have been on a couple of different boards that we
09:20:08 grappled with some of these issues.
09:20:11 And do your bylaws allow your own board to remove
09:20:14 members for any particular reason?
09:20:17 >>> Yes.
09:20:17 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: And so that would be best within
09:20:20 your own organization.
09:20:22 >>> Yes.
09:20:25 >> One board that I have served on in the past had an
09:20:27 attendance requirement.
09:20:28 And if a member missed so many meetings, I think in
09:20:32 that instance it was a percentage of meetings over a
09:20:35 calendar year -- the number was automatically re--
09:20:39 member was automatically removed but could be
09:20:40 appointed if the board thought it was important for
09:20:42 them to stand on.
09:20:45 Have you all adopted any kind of attendance policies?
09:20:50 >>> In the bylaws that we have crafted, they talk
09:20:52 about -- talks about being removed.
09:20:59 And in this thing where you talk about effective,
09:21:02 that's kind of -- who decides what effective means,
09:21:07 now what I mean?

09:21:08 So when don't really know what that means.
09:21:11 Thank you.
09:21:11 >>FRANK REDDICK: If I may just add to that.
09:21:14 Mr. Kinsey, I think you can also state to them that at
09:21:17 each meeting there is a roster there where you have to
09:21:20 sign in when you come in, and it documents the months,
09:21:26 we have the meetings whether they attended.
09:21:29 >>> There's attendance taken at all of our meetings,
09:21:32 and who is present at those meetings is shown in the
09:21:34 minutes.
09:21:38 >> I would like to thank you for your service, having
09:21:40 good strong leaders in these organizations I think is
09:21:43 important.
09:21:43 Thank you.
09:21:45 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Mr. Kinsey, right now my assistant
09:21:52 Rhonda is typing up the series of recommendations that
09:21:55 I would make with strike-throughs and in red and new
09:21:59 language in blue.
09:22:00 I would like all of the CRA advisory committees people
09:22:05 who are here from different areas to provide us a list
09:22:08 of your e-mail addresses so that as I share it with my
09:22:12 fellow CRA members and the staff that this blue line

09:22:15 gets to you all so you get the chance to see it before
09:22:18 we bring this back.
09:22:20 Thank you.
09:22:21 I would really like your input.
09:22:23 I would really like your input on the recommended
09:22:26 changes.
09:22:29 I would really like to hear yours.
09:22:31 >>MARY ALVAREZ: next.
09:22:32 Thank you, Mr. Kinsey.
09:22:34 >>> My name is Ken Stoltenberg, 1000 Channelside
09:22:39 Drive.
09:22:40 I'm a business owner in the channel and member of the
09:22:42 Channel District council functioning as its treasurer.
09:22:45 Mr. Huey was kind enough to invite us to a meeting
09:22:47 where we did discuss both of these policies several
09:22:50 weeks ago, a draft of them.
09:22:51 So we are somewhat aware of the things that are being
09:22:56 put in place.
09:22:58 I think we have a meeting next Wednesday and I think
09:23:01 it will be a great idea for Mr. Chen to come and do a
09:23:04 full presentation on both of these things, which
09:23:07 timewise works out rather well.

09:23:10 I would make that request.
09:23:12 I think overall, in concept it's a very good idea and
09:23:16 a positive step because there is going to be a lot of
09:23:18 hopefully investment and participation in these areas.
09:23:21 I think that it is important for the communities, the
09:23:24 individual communities, to make their own bylaws and
09:23:27 pretty much go with themselves and if something is out
09:23:29 of whack then fix it.
09:23:31 But let them proceed forward.
09:23:35 As for, I think, obviously I'm somebody who can easily
09:23:40 have a conflict as far as having business interests
09:23:42 and living there, and I think the best thing to do is
09:23:46 get up and announce, I'm developing this project or
09:23:49 this project or I own this business, and this would
09:23:51 probably affect me and take into account as whatever
09:23:55 someone would say.
09:23:57 Finally, I think it's a marvelous idea to come
09:24:00 directly to you, either bimonthly or weekly or
09:24:03 whatever it is.
09:24:05 Just speaking for the Channel District, it would
09:24:07 certainly make things a lot easier for us, because
09:24:10 right now, you know, if we need to talk to you folks,

09:24:14 sometimes we have to meet with you all individually,
09:24:16 which is not as convenient for everybody.
09:24:19 So we would love to come see you in a month and say
09:24:21 here's the things that we are working on and here's
09:24:23 the things that staff is assisting us with, and to
09:24:27 help you gauge how we think things are going, how we
09:24:33 think things are progressing, and obviously the pace
09:24:36 of government potentially could be faster for all of
09:24:40 us, and I think that's the way you can really hear the
09:24:42 concerns of the community where staff is either doing
09:24:44 a good job or perhaps they could use some improvement.
09:24:48 And I think that's a marvelous opportunity for to us
09:24:51 come directly to you.
09:24:52 Finally, I would say that the actual board members who
09:24:57 come to you, they should be elected from the
09:25:00 community.
09:25:00 They shouldn't be appointed from the city.
09:25:02 That I think is a recipe for disaster.
09:25:07 I don't think -- somebody could say, well, the port is
09:25:12 a big part of the Channel District.
09:25:13 It's very hard to get them to come to our meetings and
09:25:17 their whole presentation, maybe 50 slides of container

09:25:19 ships, one on cruise ships and nothing else in the
09:25:21 district.
09:25:22 So if you can't get them to participate, it shouldn't
09:25:25 be mandated that any group be part of it if they don't
09:25:30 want to.
09:25:31 They have got things to do.
09:25:32 Thank you so much.
09:25:33 >>MARY ALVAREZ: If that's going to be the policy that
09:25:37 the community is going to come and talk to the
09:25:41 council, then it needs to be scheduled.
09:25:45 Either that or some other avenues are going to have to
09:25:48 be opened, because we are already an hour late getting
09:25:51 into our other -- but anyway, be that as it may, thank
09:25:56 you, Mr. Stoltenberg.
09:25:59 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Ken, this sunshine issue, do you
09:26:02 all consider yourselves sunshined right now?
09:26:07 >>> We notice our meetings but we also function very
09:26:09 much as a neighborhood organization where we get two
09:26:12 or three people or four people or six people together
09:26:14 and talk to each other.
09:26:15 I don't know if there's a way that you can say, if we
09:26:17 are giving you folks a formal recommendation that it

09:26:21 is in the sunshine we can kind of talk to each other
09:26:23 when we need to.
09:26:24 I don't know if you can make that.
09:26:26 I'm not an attorney.
09:26:28 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The bylaws of each individual
09:26:41 organization, you're either in or you're out.
09:26:45 And I think Sal will probably come to each
09:26:47 organization and talk about the options and that sort
09:26:50 of thing.
09:26:54 >>SAL TERRITO: (off microphone).
09:26:56 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: You can say you're sunshine.
09:26:59 But if you have side conversations then you are not,
09:27:01 and you put yourself at risk.
09:27:04 >>> I would think it would probably be better that we
09:27:06 are not in the sunshine.
09:27:15 >>SAL TERRITO: See how close a relationship they have.
09:27:20 (off microphone).
09:27:23 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Also, it's my understanding from
09:27:25 that case law, if they are in a position of
09:27:28 eliminating options that come to us, then that sort of
09:27:32 throws you more into the sunshine.
09:27:35 And so I think all these things can be carefully dealt

09:27:39 with.
09:27:40 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Well, this is a good step.
09:27:42 But Mr. Stoltenberg, when you said that you noticed
09:27:44 the meetings, do you put them in the newspaper?
09:27:46 Or do you put a little flier out?
09:27:49 >>> Actually, we have the same schedule.
09:27:50 We have had it for years.
09:27:51 And it's the third Wednesday of every month at the
09:27:53 Florida Aquarium at 5:30.
09:27:55 And what we do is we have -- it's posted on our web
09:27:58 site for people to come look at.
09:28:00 Then we also send out an e-mail.
09:28:02 Get it done on Fridays but normally on Mondays before
09:28:05 the meeting saying here is our meeting, here's the
09:28:07 time and this is what we will talk about.
09:28:13 >> And Mr. Kinsey, how do you notice your meetings?
09:28:15 Thank you.
09:28:20 >>> (speaking off microphone).
09:28:21 >>MARY ALVAREZ: The clerk's office?
09:28:24 Okay, thank you.
09:28:26 Ms. Saul-Sena, did you have anything?
09:28:29 Mr. Fletcher, did you have a question?

09:28:32 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: No.
09:28:33 The sunshine issue is going to be important.
09:28:38 The thing we need to get the city attorney to know,
09:28:41 the situation that we are in.
09:28:43 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Ms. Saul-Sena?
09:28:45 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Mr. Territo, you don't have to
09:28:47 answer this but think about it for when we continue
09:28:49 this discussion.
09:28:49 If the CRA board involvement with the advisory
09:28:52 committee is here, noticed, posted, on Thursdays at
09:28:57 1:30 every other week, that seems to me to be a public
09:29:02 meeting where the public can speak as well as board
09:29:04 members.
09:29:04 And I don't see why that would shed any -- anyway,
09:29:10 just think about it and share with us later.
09:29:12 Thanks.
09:29:13 Later like in writing.
09:29:19 >>> Good morning, council.
09:29:20 Henry Lewis, 119 north 11th street.
09:29:22 I am a resident and business owner in the Channel
09:29:24 District.
09:29:27 And also vice-president of the D.E.C.

09:29:33 Most of the concerns and questions I have already been
09:29:36 asked.
09:29:36 First of all, we really appreciate this policy.
09:29:39 We need, all of us, to continue going with the city.
09:29:45 Two of my concerns, first of all, the draft that I
09:29:48 have seen is only the draft as of February 5th.
09:29:51 I don't know if this is an updated draft, or if
09:29:54 there's something that's more complete.
09:29:55 But if we could get a copy of something, that would be
09:29:59 most helpful.
09:30:01 >>MARY ALVAREZ: We do have a March 15th draft.
09:30:05 >>> That would be most helpful.
09:30:14 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Linda?
09:30:16 Linda?
09:30:21 >>> The other concern I have, I think Linda gave a
09:30:26 little bit is selection process.
09:30:28 Who is actually responsible to select the CRA advisory
09:30:31 committee?
09:30:32 Is it going to be our community, our representatives
09:30:35 that we currently have?
09:30:37 You know, we hold annual elections, and we elect our
09:30:40 president, vice-president,, you know, whole Board of

09:30:44 Directors.
09:30:45 And then we have a couple of members at large.
09:30:47 Now are these people who are to elect the advisory
09:30:50 committee for the CRA?
09:30:52 I think the community should be involved rather than
09:30:57 the city to say who is going to be on the advisory
09:31:01 board.
09:31:02 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I think when you have your
09:31:04 organizational meetings you pick who you want, or
09:31:06 whoever wants to run, or whoever wants to be on the
09:31:08 committee.
09:31:10 I don't think anybody else -- the staff is certainly
09:31:14 not going to do it.
09:31:17 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think the question is, does the
09:31:20 community at large take the new members as new members
09:31:22 come on, as compared to, is it a self-perpetuating
09:31:27 organization where the committee takes people?
09:31:29 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I guess whoever is interested in it.
09:31:32 Whoever is interested just like you have done before.
09:31:37 >>> We are currently rewriting our bylaws to maybe
09:31:39 coordinate with the policies and procedures that you
09:31:41 are setting down today or in the affection next week

09:31:43 or so, and would like them to correlate, so they work
09:31:47 in conjunction, so we don't have to go and change
09:31:50 again.
09:31:50 Currently we already have our Board of Directors
09:31:53 selected for this year.
09:31:55 And we would like that Board of Directors.
09:31:57 Many of those same directors will sit on the advisory
09:31:59 board.
09:32:01 But we would like to be able to have that.
09:32:04 >>GWEN MILLER: You have your bylaws.
09:32:08 And what your bylaws state is what you do.
09:32:10 If the committee wants to appoint them or if the
09:32:12 advisory board, that's what you do.
09:32:15 Whatever you put in your bylaws.
09:32:18 >>> That's all I have.
09:32:20 Thank you for your service.
09:32:25 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Next.
09:32:27 >>> Smith, 403 south Manhattan.
09:32:29 I'm not sure if I'm at the right time with any of this
09:32:32 but we have a business in Drew Park at 4812 north
09:32:36 Grady and the upcoming proposal that we saw in the
09:32:40 paper that came out March 3rd of a large portion

09:32:45 becoming strictly residential.
09:32:46 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Sir, I don't think this is the time to
09:32:51 talk about this.
09:32:52 This is only the policy -- advisory committee policy.
09:32:57 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Okay, thank you.
09:32:59 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Thank you.
09:32:59 Next.
09:33:05 >>> Christine Burdick with the Tampa downtown
09:33:07 partnership.
09:33:08 I'm also not a community advisory member want.
09:33:14 I'm a wanna be because as of yet there is not a
09:33:17 community advisory -- there isn't a community advisory
09:33:21 committee for the downtown district, since just last
09:33:25 year we became an area that would have -- would have
09:33:28 funding to get input on.
09:33:30 But I speak generally to the need, or at least the
09:33:37 advice of having a good policy.
09:33:38 You sitting as the CRA board, you are the body that is
09:33:42 responsible for this, for the CRA, and so I think a
09:33:47 workable policy that establishes a general operating
09:33:51 principle and structure is in your best interest, or
09:33:54 in the best interest of all of these various

09:33:57 committees and areas.
09:33:59 I have worked in other cities where the opportunity of
09:34:02 the community input is very important to you and it's
09:34:05 important to the community as well.
09:34:07 So I think this discussion itself just shows that
09:34:11 perhaps it would be good to involve the existing
09:34:13 committee and others who might be involved directly
09:34:17 and how those committees function to sit down as a
09:34:20 joint body to help give input to form a workable
09:34:25 policy, both for those committees, as well as you.
09:34:28 And I think this is a very good initial start.
09:34:31 And I think it is in your best interest to adopt such
09:34:34 a policy.
09:34:35 And it helps us with those because even this won't
09:34:41 standardize how they operate but I would be happy to
09:34:44 give input.
09:34:45 And I think I hear from the others that they might
09:34:47 want to be involved.
09:34:49 I just urge you --
09:34:50 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Like you said, this is a good initial
09:34:52 first step.
09:34:53 It's a draft.

09:34:54 So it doesn't mean that it's written in stone yet.
09:34:57 So it's a good -- what you said is a good way to get
09:35:01 started.
09:35:03 And I believe that Mr. Huey has taken that into
09:35:05 consideration.
09:35:07 >>> Because we expect to be involved in the formation,
09:35:12 I certainly am interested in having input into that.
09:35:16 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Mr. Dingfelder.
09:35:17 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Two things.
09:35:19 When you do meet with your own group, at some point
09:35:23 come back and talk to us about sunshine.
09:35:25 It's probably premature right this second.
09:35:28 Just in terms of how -- it sounds like we have a
09:35:32 difference of opinion among the groups and we would
09:35:34 want your input on that.
09:35:38 >>> I can say personally that I think the effective
09:35:40 exchange of information that I think you want for
09:35:43 these bodies to be given -- I think the suggestion
09:35:49 they operate in a standardized manner but not the
09:35:52 sunshine would be best and it would be most effective
09:35:54 for what these committees have to do.
09:35:57 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And the other thing, and I had this

09:36:00 thought last week, and it's just furthered today --
09:36:04 and I think it perhaps goes along with what you were
09:36:07 saying, Christine, I think at some point over the next
09:36:10 six months or so, I think we should look at having one
09:36:14 person from each CRA join a CAC advisory committee
09:36:22 that advises us on general CRA policy.
09:36:29 In other words, take one person from downtown, one
09:36:31 person from East Tampa, one person in Ybor, one person
09:36:33 in Drew Park, et cetera, and you put them on an
09:36:36 advisory committee that works with staff and works
09:36:39 with the CRA on general issues of policy that are
09:36:43 city-wide.
09:36:43 Each one of these subcommittees is dealing myopically
09:36:49 within their own CRA neighborhood on their own issues.
09:36:53 But I think that we could always use some advisory,
09:36:57 some sort of general advisory opinion, especially at
09:36:59 the end of the year when we do our bigger budgets and
09:37:02 that sort of thing on our overall policy.
09:37:05 It's something that I hope that we look at and --
09:37:12 >>> Something that hasn't been directly referred to
09:37:14 also is the fact that you have a very effective
09:37:17 liaison staff.

09:37:18 You have a professional staff that works for you who
09:37:22 act as a liaison with the neighborhoods, too.
09:37:24 So they need to be involved as well.
09:37:26 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Absolutely.
09:37:28 And they are.
09:37:28 We couldn't function without some staff.
09:37:32 >>> Thank you.
09:37:33 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Thank you, Ms. Burdick.
09:37:35 Mr. Moses Knotts.
09:37:40 >>> Good morning.
09:37:40 I reside at 2902 East Ellicott street.
09:37:43 And this is my second time speaking to CRA meeting.
09:37:48 I been hearing this word go around but I don't know
09:37:51 what it means.
09:37:52 You know, we don't have no aggravation out there.
09:38:01 I heard the word awhile ago one of the members say we
09:38:05 want to do things like we want to do it.
09:38:07 And now I believe, you know, something you all started
09:38:13 using the last two or three years, you all made the
09:38:16 Parks Department come here, fire department, everybody
09:38:18 come to you all second time, and report to you all.
09:38:22 But report the whole entire system.

09:38:25 But one pocket of peoples can come to you with what
09:38:29 they want to do.
09:38:32 Mr. Reddick, I am going to show you a point I been
09:38:35 saying for the last 20 years about CRA members and
09:38:37 their civic association member.
09:38:39 You mentioned about a sheet when they come to the
09:38:42 meeting, you know, sign-in sheet, you know.
09:38:46 When I was a member of the property rights, went to
09:38:51 all of the meetings, but at the civic association, and
09:38:55 Ms. Miller's husband was the president a long time
09:38:57 ago, and we never had ten members were there.
09:39:00 But I recommend you all see that sheet.
09:39:04 And I told you all many, many years, there's room for
09:39:08 four people, sometimes only two, to sit there and say
09:39:11 I want this in the neighborhood, I want this in the
09:39:12 neighborhood.
09:39:13 When I was a member of the property rights and civic
09:39:16 association, I always say we should go from door to
09:39:19 door, and send these people a letter, knock on their
09:39:22 door and say what kind of problem have you got, this
09:39:24 and that.
09:39:27 Once somebody come in there and say, thousands and

09:39:31 thousands of people.
09:39:33 We don't have nothing in our neighborhood, nobody to
09:39:36 come in front of you all to say -- Ms. Miller, the
09:39:39 last time.
09:39:42 These children got to walk in the field, across the
09:39:44 road, no walk, no pathway, no nothing, 27th Street
09:39:50 lined up one mile.
09:39:53 People in different parts of town, man, we get lights,
09:39:57 we get everything.
09:39:59 Because nobody speak for us.
09:40:01 And Mary, you hit the nail on the head.
09:40:05 Every neighborhood don't have a civic association.
09:40:07 We don't have a CRA to speak for us.
09:40:09 You all should be involved in everything.
09:40:14 You all should ride down the Street and say I want
09:40:17 some money spent here.
09:40:19 The bus tours, I don't know if you still do it or not.
09:40:22 Right in where our neighborhood is.
09:40:27 There was one with flee markets.
09:40:31 We should have them come through that neighborhood and
09:40:32 say this neighborhood needs this, this neighborhood
09:40:35 needs that.

09:40:36 22nd street no. Sidewalk.
09:40:38 No playground.
09:40:40 Told you many, many times, why don't these children
09:40:44 have no playground?
09:40:45 Been there for years, and been there for years.
09:40:50 We don't have nothing in the neighborhood.
09:40:53 The children go out and steal cars, they get bored.
09:40:56 Can't ride their bicycles.
09:40:59 A bicycle trail, walk trail.
09:41:02 Every part of town got a walk trail and thing to ride
09:41:07 except this part of town.
09:41:08 Ms. Miller, great lady, had to go to the county, walk
09:41:12 on the school property.
09:41:16 (Bell sounds).
09:41:17 >>MOSES KNOTT, JR.: Mr. Knotts, do you know Mr.
09:41:20 Kinsey?
09:41:20 >>> I see him come here.
09:41:22 >> You do know him?
09:41:23 >>> I don't know him personally I am going to
09:41:27 introduce to you.
09:41:28 Mr. Kinsey, please get with Mr. Knott and tell him
09:41:33 he's with a CRA area.

09:41:35 >>FRANK REDDICK: Also, Mr. Knotts, I want to
09:41:38 personally invite you to the East Tampa CRA meeting.
09:41:46 >>> Like I said, I wish we get a letter and mail in
09:41:49 the mail.
09:41:50 All of these neighbors to know -- we are like an
09:41:54 abandoned ship.
09:41:55 We don't know what's going on.
09:41:59 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Thank you very much.
09:42:01 Anything else?
09:42:02 Any other questions?
09:42:03 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Madam Chairman, I'm willing to do
09:42:06 what anybody else wants to but I don't know that we
09:42:09 are ready to vote on this next week.
09:42:15 >>GWEN MILLER: You didn't ask us to vote, did you?
09:42:17 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think it's on our schedule to be
09:42:19 voted on next week but we need more input.
09:42:21 >>MARY ALVAREZ: would you get to the -- Mr. Huey?
09:42:26 >>MARK HUEY: I'm sorry about that.
09:42:29 Yes, it is on the schedule to bring back to you, both
09:42:31 the TIF policy and the advisory board policy next
09:42:35 week.
09:42:36 Whether or not we can collect all of this input and be

09:42:38 responsive back to you, I do not know.
09:42:40 But we would certainly, if you want, we will make
09:42:44 every effort to do that.
09:42:48 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I believe that the TIF policy is okay
09:42:50 to bring back but I don't think the advisory committee
09:42:53 policy is ready yet.
09:42:54 And I really would recommend that you get along just
09:42:57 like Ms. Burdick said and get everybody together, and
09:43:03 have a good old-fashioned meeting.
09:43:08 >>MARK HUEY: We will do that.
09:43:09 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Did you want to say something?
09:43:12 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Just exactly what you said, we
09:43:14 believe that this needs more work.
09:43:17 And provide the CRA members with the e-mail addresses
09:43:20 of all the advisory committee members so that they can
09:43:23 communicate with us and we can community with them,
09:43:25 that would be great.
09:43:26 Thank you.
09:43:28 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Anything else, Mr. Huey, on that?
09:43:30 >>MARK HUEY: No, not on that.
09:43:32 We have a number of people here for the Drew Park
09:43:35 strategic action plan.

09:43:35 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Okay.
09:43:37 We need to --
09:43:38 >>MARK HUEY: We have one item of business.
09:43:40 Maybe we can handle that quickly.
09:43:41 Were you going to handle that, Sal?
09:43:43 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Item number 2, resolution.
09:43:53 >>> The group is doing some construction work.
09:43:55 They need to be able to marshal their trucks in one of
09:43:59 our parks.
09:44:00 >> Which?
09:44:02 >>> It's the Heights area.
09:44:04 It's the Phil BARKADAIS.
09:44:12 This is the Bourgeois project.
09:44:16 >> The license agreement would be from March 1st
09:44:18 until December.
09:44:20 >>> And you should know that part of their development
09:44:22 plan is to rebuild that park.
09:44:23 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Which could use it.
09:44:25 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Second.
09:44:28 >>> Motion and second to move the resolution.
09:44:30 All in favor please indicate by saying Aye.
09:44:32 (Motion carried).

09:44:32 Motion passes.
09:44:35 Okay.
09:44:35 Number 3.
09:44:37 >>> We presented to you three weeks ago the Drew Park
09:44:40 strategic action plan, very important game plan for us
09:44:42 in Drew Park for the next five years.
09:44:44 At that time, we had not received the advisory board
09:44:47 input yet.
09:44:49 And so the advisory board did meet a week ago Monday,
09:44:52 and they are going to present their input today.
09:44:55 And I'll just say before I have Ron Rotella come up on
09:45:01 behalf of the advisory board to remind you this is a
09:45:03 start for Drew Park.
09:45:04 It's a very bold and visionary plan for Drew Park,
09:45:08 very different than it is today.
09:45:12 Like all visionary plans, it involves change.
09:45:15 Most of the change we have contemplated like
09:45:18 stormwater fix is embraced.
09:45:22 There are some elements like land use changes which we
09:45:24 have received a lot of support for, but we have also
09:45:27 heard some concerns about.
09:45:28 And I just want to remind you that there will be

09:45:31 public processes associated with the requisite comp
09:45:34 plan changes and rezonings in the future that would
09:45:37 really guide that.
09:45:38 Process in the future.
09:45:39 So with that, I will have Ron Rotella.
09:45:43 Ron?
09:45:44 Come up and speak on behalf of the advisory group.
09:45:50 >>RON ROTELLA: Drew Park Community Advisory Committee.
09:46:04 Does everybody have a copy of the memorandum?
09:46:10 First we want to state the committee is generally in
09:46:13 consensus with the majority of the plan.
09:46:16 I think both the city staff and yours did an
09:46:20 outstanding job pulling that redevelopment plan
09:46:22 together.
09:46:23 And if you don't have a plan or you don't have goals
09:46:25 and objectives you are not going to go anywhere.
09:46:27 So we are really pleased that the plan is in place.
09:46:31 Some suggestions.
09:46:34 There's a long-standing established neighborhood that
09:46:40 generally runs from Martin Luther King to Tampa Bay
09:46:44 Boulevard, from Lois west to where the airport's
09:46:50 boundaries are, which is Hesperides Avenue.

09:46:54 That neighborhood for years has expressed their
09:46:57 ability to remain as a solid residential neighborhood,
09:47:01 and to have improvements in their neighborhood.
09:47:02 So we are recommending that instead of waiting for
09:47:10 2011 to allocate funds for housing assistance that we
09:47:15 allocate some of the funds that are now targeted for
09:47:19 neighborhood improvements, all of the 322,000 dollars
09:47:23 that is allocated for acquisition of land for
09:47:26 affordable workforce housing.
09:47:29 And reallocate those funds to housing assistance,
09:47:35 specifically for that neighborhood along with the
09:47:39 neighborhood improvement infrastructure that should
09:47:43 take place with sidewalks and landscaping.
09:47:45 We do not suggest at this point in time to change the
09:47:48 city's financial plan, and the spreadsheets that
09:47:52 accompany the plan, that this should be done as part
09:47:54 of the budget process for the TIF funds.
09:48:03 I see Rich is here this morning there. Was some
09:48:06 general concern that there was no funding allocated
09:48:09 for small businesses, for business relocation, for
09:48:13 business assistance.
09:48:14 We recommend that as TIF funds materialize over and

09:48:19 above the funds needed for debt service, if we are
09:48:22 successful with the redeveloping Drew Park, that the
09:48:28 business programs be addressed and small business
09:48:36 assistance be given.
09:48:38 And the other recommendation is we would like that
09:48:40 residential neighborhood to represent a mix of income
09:48:45 strata, mix of neighbors, diversity of neighborhood,
09:48:48 so we recommend that the plan be changed, which
09:48:52 focused on 80% of below medium income, that it's from
09:48:55 80% up to the new state guidelines, which is 140% of
09:49:00 medium income, and you talk about school teachers,
09:49:05 fire, police, personnel, and workforce housing.
09:49:07 So that's just generally our recommendations.
09:49:11 And then one final comment.
09:49:13 I think we were all surprised somewhat, and that that
09:49:17 residential areas is zoned RM-16.
09:49:21 And it's been RM-16 for years.
09:49:24 The two neighborhood residents that are on the
09:49:28 advisory committee had expressed an interest that they
09:49:32 would like to see single-family housing as the
09:49:35 priority in that area.
09:49:36 (Bell sounds).

09:49:37 And obviously that would take probably a zoning change
09:49:41 to make that happen.
09:49:44 Its functioned as an RM-16 neighborhood for many, many
09:49:48 years.
09:49:50 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Also, Mr. Rotella, if I remember
09:49:53 correctly, I had asked a question specifically about
09:49:56 the perimeter being used for multifamily housing, and
09:50:00 they agreed to that, only in the perimeter, not
09:50:02 within --
09:50:07 >>RON ROTELLA: Yes, did you bring it up.
09:50:08 Mary suggested that -- we talked about the possibility
09:50:11 of town Parks Department which obviously would work
09:50:17 great for workforce housing because you get more units
09:50:19 on a site, and Mary had suggested that maybe that
09:50:24 development be on the periphery and serve as a buffer
09:50:26 to the residential neighborhood.
09:50:28 And they seem to accept that.
09:50:36 The other thing I have to say.
09:50:38 Mary, as a member of the CRA, City Council CRA, Mary
09:50:43 has attended every one of our meetings.
09:50:45 I don't know of a meeting that she has missed.
09:50:48 She has been with us on the start of this process, and

09:50:52 I'm sure she's going to continue to participate even
09:50:55 when she's no longer on City Council, member of the
09:50:59 CRA.
09:50:59 And I want to publicly thank her for her commitment,
09:51:03 and has been to every meeting we have been to, and has
09:51:06 worked very hard on that plan and worked very hard
09:51:08 with us.
09:51:08 Mary, thank you very much.
09:51:10 >>GWEN MILLER: Add her to the board.
09:51:16 >>RON ROTELLA: She would be an outstanding member of
09:51:18 our board.
09:51:18 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Thank you so much.
09:51:21 I appreciate that.
09:51:21 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Mr. Territo, would we have the
09:51:25 ability to say we adopt the plan with the inclusion or
09:51:27 adjustments that are recommended in the memorandum
09:51:29 from the advisory committee?
09:51:32 >>SAL TERRITO: You have that authority, yes.
09:51:34 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: That might solve our problem.
09:51:37 >>MARY ALVAREZ: This would really be so, so good,
09:51:42 because this is -- I worked really hard, like Mr.
09:51:45 Rotella said, to make sure that this Drew Park area

09:51:50 has been put on the map, finally, and the
09:51:53 administration has seen to it that Drew Park is a
09:51:58 vital part of our city.
09:52:01 And for years and years, nothing was happening there.
09:52:03 And now I think we are going to have -- we have some
09:52:07 people in there that will say actually that this
09:52:11 administration or this City Council, and this CRA
09:52:14 board, has actually stood up for Drew Park, and also I
09:52:20 want to thank the members of the CRA board that work
09:52:25 so diligently with us.
09:52:27 I'm sorry that there's not a list there.
09:52:30 And I don't see anybody else there.
09:52:32 But Rich has been to a lot of meetings too and I want
09:52:37 to thank everybody that worked so hard for this, and
09:52:40 Mr. Griminger, and his aide.
09:52:43 And this has been a long time in coming.
09:52:45 And I think that we are doing the best thing that we
09:52:49 could possibly do for the Drew Park area.
09:52:51 And I want to thank everybody.
09:52:55 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And we thank you, Mary, for all
09:52:57 your dedication to all the CRAs.
09:53:00 The gentleman in the striped shirt who owned property

09:53:02 on Grady, I would like to hear.
09:53:07 >> We are going to hear from him in a minute.
09:53:13 Had you Huey think there's a few people.
09:53:15 >>> Against again, I'm Matthew Smith.
09:53:18 We have property on Grady at 4812 north Grady.
09:53:22 A lumber yard there.
09:53:25 From what I saw in the newspaper, I have not been to
09:53:28 any of the meetings, and am not aware of the process.
09:53:38 That the area around us, all of that is proposed to
09:53:41 become residential in the future.
09:53:43 I understand that certain areas will be grandfathered
09:53:45 in.
09:53:47 However, running a decent size business that has
09:53:54 trucks coming in and out, I know it's difficult to
09:53:57 operate out of an area if we all of a sudden have
09:54:00 residential moving up against us.
09:54:02 I just wanted to come by and express my concern.
09:54:08 I talked to probably seven other business people in
09:54:11 the area, and they all pretty much agreed, they were
09:54:17 unaware that was trying to be rezoned residential, and
09:54:20 they all had concerns about it.
09:54:25 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Mr. Gremminger, would you like to

09:54:28 answer his concern, please?
09:54:30 >>> Keith Gremminger, for the Drew Park action plan.
09:54:37 He's correct, that the redesignation, the proposed
09:54:43 redesignation of land use would change.
09:54:47 And the land use category that we are using right now
09:54:51 is currently a CMU-35 community mixed use 35, is not a
09:54:59 strictly residential land use.
09:55:01 It is the broadest land use available to your planning
09:55:08 exercise that does not incorporate industrial
09:55:12 businesses.
09:55:13 With that said, the business is grandfathered in.
09:55:17 It can continue to operate.
09:55:18 And actually expand to the life of their existence.
09:55:28 The only change that would take place for the business
09:55:32 would -- dormant for over a six-month period, the land
09:55:37 would actually become the new land use.
09:55:39 You can continue to operate as a business in your
09:55:42 current capacity.
09:55:46 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Thank you, Mr. Gremminger.
09:55:48 Does that answer your question?
09:55:49 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Madam Chair.
09:55:54 It's an interesting -- it's an interesting issue,

09:55:57 because right now, as you look at the existing land
09:56:01 uses and the existing zoning for that Grady corridor,
09:56:05 it's predominantly, you know, light industrial land
09:56:09 use, and a lot of IG zoning.
09:56:16 And I think that's probably one of the reasons why you
09:56:19 moved there, from the prior location, as I recall.
09:56:29 We are not doing any rezoning.
09:56:31 We are not even doing any land use plan changes today.
09:56:34 We are being asked to adopt a strategic action plan,
09:56:39 but it's sort of a precursor to any future land use
09:56:43 changes or any future -- any changes.
09:56:47 So this is really, really early in the process.
09:56:50 That doesn't mean that your concerns aren't warranted.
09:56:53 And I think you might want to come back up.
09:57:03 I do have some concerns about how we would transition.
09:57:05 Because on the one hand, you know, the community and
09:57:07 this council, acting as the CRA, might want to see
09:57:13 some multifamily up and down Grady and that sort of
09:57:16 thing, turn it into a town center type of area, in the
09:57:19 long-term plan.
09:57:20 And that might be a good thing for everybody.
09:57:22 But the flip side is, how do you continue to operate

09:57:25 your business?
09:57:26 It might be noisy, dusty or what have you during that
09:57:31 transition period.
09:57:32 I think it's something that everybody has to be
09:57:34 sensitive to.
09:57:38 On all sides.
09:57:40 >>> Just want to be more part of it, find out what's
09:57:42 going on, and what the future hold.
09:57:46 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Come to the meetings.
09:57:47 Thank you.
09:57:49 Next.
09:57:53 >>> 3029 ridgefield circle, Valrico.
09:57:57 I was here with my brother earlier but he had to
09:57:59 leave.
09:58:00 He's a property owner, owns several properties in Drew
09:58:03 Park, and also a business owner in Drew Park.
09:58:08 We are opposed to what you are trying to do for a
09:58:10 number of reasons.
09:58:11 First of all, you're getting property, some of these
09:58:17 properties that have been so zoned commercial,
09:58:19 industrial, for over half a century, and you are just
09:58:23 changing them.

09:58:24 And what that in effect is doing is it's causing
09:58:28 people that own these properties, that bought some of
09:58:30 these properties, as investment properties, it's going
09:58:33 to cost them a lot of money.
09:58:35 It reduces the value of the property.
09:58:38 You have to keep in mind that the airport has already
09:58:41 taken over one fourth of Drew Park.
09:58:43 Those businesses that were in that portion of Drew
09:58:46 Park had tried to relocate in other areas of Drew
09:58:49 Park, because it's such a centrally located area.
09:58:54 And for you guys to come and say, well, you know, we
09:58:56 are going to change all the zoning and make it this
09:59:01 for the betterment of the whole thing, which doesn't
09:59:04 make a whole lot of sense to me because apparently we
09:59:08 have been ignored, not you personally, but the City
09:59:09 Council has been ignoring Drew Park for the last half
09:59:13 century, and now you decide that we are going to do
09:59:16 something, but you are stepping on a bunch of toes
09:59:19 when you do this.
09:59:22 Now the supreme court ruled, on June 24th, 2005,
09:59:26 in the Kelo versus Connecticut case that the city had
09:59:32 the right, in a 5-4 decision, the city had the right

09:59:37 to take condemned property and give it to individuals,
09:59:42 private individuals, because it was in the best
09:59:45 interest of the government and the city.
09:59:48 Now, that caused a number of other states, there were
09:59:52 a number of states, to react to this, including the
09:59:55 State of Florida, which said, the use of eminent
10:00:00 domain to prevent or eliminate blight or public
10:00:05 nuisance is no longer considered a valid purpose or
10:00:08 public purpose under section A, article 10, state
10:00:12 Constitution.
10:00:14 In reaction to the Kelo decision Florida voters pass a
10:00:19 Constitutional referendum number 8 to eminent domain
10:00:24 to transfer to private property or natural person or
10:00:28 private entity, to receive an exception to this rule
10:00:30 requires a 3/5 majority.
10:00:34 Now we know that you are not actually doing this, but
10:00:37 you are.
10:00:38 You're tweaking the zoning, and you're eliminating
10:00:41 some zoning in order to favor developers to go in here
10:00:46 and buy up this property.
10:00:48 And I think that's wrong.
10:00:52 And we will fight it.

10:00:53 Thank you.
10:00:58 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: Sir, so we are clear on where we
10:01:00 are in the process.
10:01:01 As you said, just so you're clear, no one here is
10:01:06 proposing that any of this land be condemned, or taken
10:01:11 through eminent domain action.
10:01:14 Nor are we yet at this point proposing formally any
10:01:18 land use changes.
10:01:19 That is down the road.
10:01:20 This is what you might call an exercise where the
10:01:25 community has gotten together along with the city and
10:01:30 developed a new future land use plan for this area
10:01:35 that in theory would be adopted through both
10:01:39 comprehensive plan changes and zoning changes, which
10:01:42 you're referring to in here.
10:01:44 So I hear what you're saying, and I think the issue of
10:01:48 where industrial and heavy commercial uses will be in
10:01:50 the city, I think, is an issue for discussion and
10:01:55 debate.
10:01:55 And I hope you will stay engaged.
10:01:58 But at this point, the fears that you have indicated
10:02:01 that we are going to take your land and turn it over

10:02:05 to develop, I think, are premature and I hope you will
10:02:08 stay in the process so that your voice can be heard as
10:02:11 we go through the redevelopment process for Drew Park.
10:02:16 >>> Changing zoning itself is hurt enough.
10:02:21 It's creating.
10:02:24 >> And just so I'm clear, we are not to that point
10:02:26 yet.
10:02:29 >>> I want to know which direction you're headed and
10:02:32 I'm not sure -- you know that by reading this report,
10:02:35 which sounds real glamorous but is not, you know, not
10:02:38 real factual.
10:02:46 It's property, comparing Drew Park to Carrollwood and
10:02:49 Palma Ceia.
10:02:54 >>MARY ALVAREZ: We have the report.
10:02:55 Thank you very much.
10:02:58 >>> Thank you.
10:03:01 >>> My name is Sandra Garciga, grantwood drive.
10:03:07 My husband and I, Jose, have a catering business, in
10:03:11 Tampa.
10:03:11 We have been in business 20 years.
10:03:15 Three weeks ago, we just moved into a building that we
10:03:17 purchased in the Drew Park area on Grady.

10:03:21 We had no idea about what was happening.
10:03:25 The gentleman from peninsula lumber did contact us.
10:03:30 I feel like if something was printed in the paper it
10:03:33 was very general maybe, possibly the business owners
10:03:37 should have been contacted.
10:03:39 That would have been, I think, a little more of a
10:03:42 decent things to do.
10:03:43 I am all for growth.
10:03:45 Obviously, if you rezone this area as residential,
10:03:50 that does depreciate the value of our commercial
10:03:52 property that we have only been in three weeks.
10:03:57 I see your allotment for money.
10:03:59 I think it was like $322,000.
10:04:02 We paid far more than that for our property.
10:04:04 And I know this is preliminary.
10:04:05 I totally understand that.
10:04:08 If you're planning on buying people out, I don't
10:04:12 know -- I know it's a long-term thing for you all.
10:04:17 But my concern is why would you put families in an
10:04:20 area that you need to really clean up an area and get
10:04:23 all the little -- I mean, that's what needs to -- I
10:04:31 can't imagine moving a family in an area that every

10:04:35 other block has a girlie place and nudie place.
10:04:40 >>MARY ALVAREZ: We are working on that too, ma'am.
10:04:42 Nobody is taking your property.
10:04:44 And I'm sorry that nobody got ahold of you.
10:04:46 >>> No, no one has contacted us.
10:04:48 I don't think that's right.
10:04:50 >> Who did you think was going to contact you?
10:04:52 >>> Can't you send letters out?
10:04:54 >>MARY ALVAREZ: No.
10:04:55 We, I guess, don't --
10:05:01 >>> We bought our property four months, three months
10:05:03 ago, just moved in.
10:05:04 But we have legally bought our property three months
10:05:06 ago.
10:05:07 I mean, to put something general in the paper, you
10:05:09 know, who reads every section of the paper if you
10:05:12 don't think it applies to you?
10:05:14 I respect what you're doing.
10:05:15 I'm all for growth.
10:05:16 I'm all for community.
10:05:17 I'm all for children.
10:05:18 I'm a mother.

10:05:19 I'm a grandmother.
10:05:20 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Me too.
10:05:22 >>> I think that's great.
10:05:24 But I do feel like there was a lack of communication.
10:05:28 And we just want to be informed.
10:05:31 Everything has a price in life.
10:05:33 >>> Nobody is going to be buying you out.
10:05:35 >> But I thank you for your time.
10:05:37 We would just like to be informed.
10:05:40 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Thank you very much.
10:05:41 What you might want to do is join the CRA --
10:05:44 >>> I had no idea that there was one.
10:05:46 I would like to give this gentleman a card.
10:05:55 Or Ron Rotella, one of them.
10:05:58 >>> We are going to get back to our business.
10:06:00 Thank you so much.
10:06:02 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Mr. Fletcher.
10:06:04 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: To kind of wrap things up on this,
10:06:07 I think I appreciate the business owners coming down
10:06:10 because I think this is a healthy discussion of how we
10:06:14 are going to move forward with this and still keep
10:06:17 vibrant jobs job-creating businesses in the city.

10:06:23 One thing that I would like to know at some point is
10:06:25 how these different types of businesses that we have
10:06:27 heard from fit into this community mixed-use land
10:06:30 designation.
10:06:31 I think that's part of the large discussion.
10:06:33 I'm not sure whether or not, for instance, a catering
10:06:38 business to continue to operate on this land use as a
10:06:40 conforming use.
10:06:41 I think it probably could.
10:06:43 But I think that's part of what we need to have as
10:06:46 part of this community discussion, to make sure that
10:06:49 good, strong businesses continue to be in this area.
10:06:52 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Absolutely.
10:06:53 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: And I want to thank the chair for
10:06:57 moving forward on this and all her hard work, and if
10:07:00 she supports going forward with this plan with the
10:07:02 modifications proposed in the memo from Mr. Rotella, I
10:07:05 would support that action at this time.
10:07:07 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Is that a motion?
10:07:09 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I second that.
10:07:11 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Oh, we got one more.
10:07:17 >>> I'm on the committee.

10:07:18 I want to say that I think it was great that we have
10:07:20 this opportunity to talk.
10:07:23 I would like to see a lot of the business owners who
10:07:25 were here today.
10:07:26 I really would like for them to participate in the
10:07:28 committee, because I think their opinions are
10:07:31 valuable.
10:07:32 My main concern -- and I am on the committee, and I do
10:07:37 agree with a lot of the plan.
10:07:39 However, as far as the businesses are concerned, we
10:07:41 need to understand that these businesses have been
10:07:44 here for generations and generations.
10:07:48 It is their livelihood, as well as if we do a study of
10:07:53 economic impact of these businesses, it's probably
10:07:56 quite a bit more, as some of these new condominiums
10:08:00 coming in or townhouses coming in, it will be
10:08:02 contributing to Tampa.
10:08:03 I think we need to look and see what the airport went
10:08:05 through when they were relocating people.
10:08:08 And there were businesses that had been put out of
10:08:11 business.
10:08:11 One had to move up part of their business to Georgia,

10:08:15 another to Lakeland, another one flat went out of
10:08:17 business.
10:08:19 When the businesses were relocated for the land
10:08:21 acquisition for the airport.
10:08:23 That's economic impact locally in Tampa.
10:08:27 And not all that's new is shiny.
10:08:31 So you know, these businesses are putting money back
10:08:34 into Tampa.
10:08:36 Besides the fact that they have been there.
10:08:37 And they have been there when Drew Park was unattended
10:08:41 and nobody was fixing it up.
10:08:43 Okay.
10:08:43 They are there now.
10:08:44 We are going to start getting some benefits.
10:08:46 And may not be able to reap the benefits.
10:08:50 I want to realize that the business side is being
10:08:52 moved by the plan.
10:08:55 We got reduced about 25% of what it is now.
10:08:58 That's a big impact.
10:08:59 And it's not just to make it prettier.
10:09:04 Economic impact for Tampa.
10:09:06 Businesses, employees, and just growth.

10:09:08 It is there.
10:09:09 We represent -- the businesses represent a lot.
10:09:12 So I just want to say I'm glad there's a lot of
10:09:14 potential in Drew Park.
10:09:15 I'm glad it's happening.
10:09:16 But the small businesses are not so small and
10:09:21 represent a lot of economy for Tampa for their own
10:09:25 livelihood.
10:09:26 Thank you.
10:09:27 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Thank you.
10:09:28 Mr. Dingfelder.
10:09:29 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thanks.
10:09:36 I have some concerns about moving forward today, just
10:09:39 based upon the two or three comments from business
10:09:42 owners along those areas.
10:09:48 I'm confident that you and Janett and the rest of your
10:09:52 team have made great efforts at outreach to the
10:09:54 community.
10:09:54 But now sort of at the eleventh hour of this, you
10:09:58 know, visioning exercise, we are hearing some
10:10:02 concerns.
10:10:03 And I think to ignore those concerns is not -- unless

10:10:08 there's some sort of -- some urgency that I'm unaware
10:10:13 of, I don't know why we would be moving forward unless
10:10:15 we have some specific discussions with those folks,
10:10:20 and see how they play out, and then come back in a
10:10:22 couple weeks after you have had some discussion was
10:10:24 these individuals.
10:10:28 You know, I have some concerns about this transition
10:10:31 issue that I don't know, maybe you have addressed it
10:10:35 somewhere in some text that we have that I am not
10:10:39 aware of, that's very possible.
10:10:45 >>> If I could, I think Mr. Huey at the opening
10:10:47 statement about CRA plan, strategic action plan that
10:10:49 we are proposing, stated very clearly, and councilman
10:10:57 also stated that, it is a recommendation for a
10:10:58 process.
10:10:59 So that process is something that we'll be engaged in
10:11:03 after this adoption.
10:11:05 Now, whether the process to the strategic action plan,
10:11:11 it's really a decision to be made in the future.
10:11:14 With regard to --
10:11:16 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I have one other question.
10:11:18 Also, have we analyzed, as Marissa, is that her name?

10:11:24 -- pointed out, have we analyzed the job loss?
10:11:27 Because what I am seeing in different parts of the
10:11:28 city including my district in South Tampa is that
10:11:31 basically we are sort of saying, you know, everything
10:11:35 in South Tampa needs to be residential, and, you know,
10:11:39 we are sort of closing out or pushing out various
10:11:41 businesses, they are naturally going away just because
10:11:45 of the economics of things in South Tampa.
10:11:47 I'm just wondering, are we now shifting that to Drew
10:11:50 Park?
10:11:51 And basically saying, well, we really aren't too keen
10:11:54 on industry or business in Drew Park, or we are going
10:11:57 to shift it somewhere where it's not, which
10:12:00 effectively might chase at way, and then we are going
10:12:02 to be pushing it somewhere else.
10:12:03 And have we looked at how many jobs we could be losing
10:12:07 by doing that?
10:12:07 >>MARK HUEY: I can answer that in fairness to Keith
10:12:14 because you asked on Drew Park and you are asking a
10:12:17 more strategic sort of city-wide question.
10:12:19 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'm not.
10:12:21 I am specifically asking as relates to Drew Park.

10:12:25 >>MARK HUEY: What you were asking is what is the
10:12:29 overall sort of job impact as relates to --
10:12:31 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Well, I'm asking specifically as
10:12:33 related to Drew Park.
10:12:34 If we are talking about taking that Grady corridor
10:12:37 which now appears to have a lot of light industrial,
10:12:39 and turning it into a residential/CMU type of thing,
10:12:44 residential, retail, you know, light office, which is
10:12:47 typically what I think of in CMU 35 --
10:12:51 >>MARK HUEY: What you would see is --
10:12:53 >> Have we looked at how many jobs we might be losing?
10:12:57 >>> No, that has been not been considered.
10:12:59 And part of the complexity of that is it's very
10:13:01 different jobs are contemplated.
10:13:03 The CMU 35 would envision a whole variety of
10:13:06 commercial uses.
10:13:08 But they would be different.
10:13:09 For example, it might relate to medical offices that
10:13:14 are associated with the health care complex around St.
10:13:17 Joseph, which is built out to its extreme.
10:13:20 And so it would be a different kind of job than is
10:13:24 presently there.

10:13:25 But I would like to really encourage to you move
10:13:27 forward.
10:13:27 This is a very important game plan for us.
10:13:30 There will be many opportunities to the comp plan
10:13:33 change process as that unfolds to have these kind of
10:13:37 discussions.
10:13:37 And I'd like to point out that every plan -- because
10:13:44 it's more than a visioning exercise.
10:13:45 There's an element that's going to guide our
10:13:48 redevelopment efforts.
10:13:50 That's why we need to move forward.
10:13:51 But they involve controversial recommendations.
10:13:53 If you recall, this is our third one.
10:13:56 In the case of Ybor, it was 7th Avenue.
10:13:58 And the future of 7th Avenue and should it be
10:14:02 opened or not.
10:14:03 And it was a very volatile and emotional issue, very
10:14:07 controversial.
10:14:08 In the case of the Channel District it was all about
10:14:11 height and density.
10:14:13 And so it was a very controversial -- well, this plan
10:14:17 also has its elements that are bold and will be worked

10:14:23 as we move forward.
10:14:24 So I think by definition, our plans, because they are
10:14:28 recommending change, and contemplating a different
10:14:31 future for these blighted redevelopment areas, are
10:14:34 going to have elements of them that are potentially
10:14:39 controversial.
10:14:39 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I don't think council is afraid of
10:14:44 controversy.
10:14:45 I think what I'm afraid of, the courts -- awhile back,
10:14:49 10, 15 years ago, D.O.T. was in the business of sort
10:14:53 of doing these maps of proposed road changes.
10:14:55 And the courts looked at those maps and said, now
10:14:58 what?
10:14:58 Those maps, because they have been codified by an
10:15:02 agency, okay, can constitute a taking and that sort of
10:15:08 thing.
10:15:08 So when we say, well, it's just a map and it's just a
10:15:11 visioning exercise, that's one thing.
10:15:13 But when this council votes on it, it sort of defines
10:15:19 in a generic way where we think this area is going to
10:15:22 go.
10:15:22 And that's okay.

10:15:23 That's our role.
10:15:24 And I'm a little bit concerned, because for the first
10:15:27 time, we are hearing some concerns out there from
10:15:32 property owners.
10:15:34 These are not abstract concerns.
10:15:35 These are concerns from property owners who say, wait
10:15:38 a second, for whatever reason, we haven't plugged
10:15:43 ourselves in, and we want to be plugged in.
10:15:45 And I think that, therefore, we should slow down a
10:15:48 little bit, and address those concerns, and come back
10:15:51 in a month or whatever, and then look to see whether
10:15:56 or not we are in the same position we need to be.
10:16:00 >>GWEN MILLER: Now this is just a start.
10:16:02 As we go along, can changes be made?
10:16:04 Can we look into what the neighbors are telling you?
10:16:09 >>MARK HUEY: Absolutely.
10:16:10 We are expecting much more engage 789 as we go along.
10:16:13 You are not sitting as council today authorizing
10:16:15 rezonings or comp plan changes.
10:16:17 You are sitting as a CRA board, and now through this
10:16:20 plan you will be giving guidance for your staff to
10:16:23 take next steps, which will involve very intensive,

10:16:27 very public processes in the case of the land use
10:16:30 changes.
10:16:34 Sitting as council.
10:16:37 >>GWEN MILLER: And you are going to come back to us
10:16:38 and let us know what you are doing.
10:16:40 >>> The whole process will be public and very engaging
10:16:43 of the community all along the way.
10:16:46 >>GWEN MILLER: I would like to make a motion that we
10:16:48 move forward.
10:16:49 >>MARY ALVAREZ: We did.
10:16:51 We have a motion and second on the floor to adopt the
10:16:56 Drew Park strategic action plan modifications.
10:16:59 All in favor.
10:16:59 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I want to speak to the.
10:17:02 I appreciate what the industrial property owners and
10:17:04 the commercial property owners said, and I promise you
10:17:06 that as we go forward we will really work intensively
10:17:10 on this.
10:17:11 I have many of the same questions.
10:17:12 I talked about it with Mr. Gremminger, Mr. Huey.
10:17:17 We need to a address this.
10:17:19 But this is really big picture vision with the

10:17:21 modifications suggested by the advisory board.
10:17:25 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Thank you, Ms. Saul-Sena.
10:17:27 All in favor --
10:17:29 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I make a substitute motion that we
10:17:30 continue this for one month to get additional input
10:17:33 from the property owners, especially the ones who have
10:17:36 spoken today.
10:17:37 That's my motion.
10:17:40 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Dies for lack of second.
10:17:44 Go back to the motion.
10:17:45 All in favor please indicate by saying Aye.
10:17:47 Nay?
10:17:47 >>THE CLERK: Dingfelder, no.
10:17:52 (Motion Carried)
10:17:52 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I move at next week's CRA meeting
10:17:57 we bring back the borrowing policy for a vote.
10:18:03 That's a motion.
10:18:04 Always Alvarez we have a motion.
10:18:05 Do we have a second?
10:18:07 >> Second.
10:18:07 >>MARY ALVAREZ: We have a motion to bring back the
10:18:12 borrowing presentation next week.

10:18:15 >>> We also have the CRA services next week and for
10:18:17 the following meeting in March we'll have an annual
10:18:21 report and approval of those CRA services.
10:18:25 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Should we start at 8:00 in the
10:18:27 morning?
10:18:27 >>> Yes, I didn't really plan this one too well, did
10:18:29 I?
10:18:30 >>GWEN MILLER: We sure didn't.
10:18:31 [ Laughter ]
10:18:32 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I have a point of order.
10:18:35 >>> Again I'm thinking that really next week should be
10:18:38 a 30-minute confrontation.
10:18:40 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: No, it needs to be 8:00.
10:18:46 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Do we have a second?
10:18:48 >>THE CLERK: Madam Chair, do you wish to vote on your
10:18:51 first motion about bringing back the borrowing policy
10:18:54 for next week?
10:18:56 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: That motion and begin at 8:00.
10:19:00 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I thought we did.
10:19:01 >>GWEN MILLER: No.
10:19:03 >>MARY ALVAREZ: All in favor please indicate by saying
10:19:05 Aye.

10:19:05 (Motion carried).
10:19:08 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Question of clarification.
10:19:10 Our vote on the strategic action plan, did that
10:19:11 include Mr. Rotella's?
10:19:14 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Yes.
10:19:15 >> My motion was to adopt the plan with amendments as
10:19:18 suggested in the memorandum by Mr. Rotella.
10:19:22 >> Second.
10:19:22 >>MARY ALVAREZ: We have a motion on the floor and
10:19:25 second to meet at 8:00 next week.
10:19:26 All in favor?
10:19:32 >>GWEN MILLER: I say Nay. When we schedule an 8:00
10:19:41 meeting nobody is here but you and I.
10:19:44 And we just sit around until 8:30 when they get here.
10:19:51 >>MARY ALVAREZ: So the motion fails.
10:19:54 >>CLERK: Dingfelder, Reddick and Miller voted no.
10:19:58 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Is there anything that says City
10:20:01 Council has to start at nine?
10:20:03 Why don't we bump City Council to 9:30?
10:20:08 We have CRA meeting is going till 10:20, 10:30, then
10:20:14 maybe it doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
10:20:18 Always Alvarez so we meet at 8:30 next week.

10:20:21 Mr. Huey, did you have something else?
10:20:24 >>MARK HUEY: No.
10:20:24 I just circulated our tentative schedule.
10:20:26 Of course it's changed but on the advisory board,
10:20:29 policy approval.
10:20:29 But to keep you updated on the things before us.
10:20:32 Thank you very much for your attention.
10:20:34 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Anything else to come before this
10:20:36 board?
10:20:37 Adjourned.
10:20:38 >> Move to receive and file.
10:20:39 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Motion to receive and file all
10:20:42 documents.
10:20:42 (Motion carried).
10:20:44 Now we are adjourned.
10:20:58 (CRA meeting adjourned at 10:21 a.m.)